On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 05:52:20AM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 12 May 2000, Roman V. Shaposhnick wrote:
>
> > Jeff,
> >
> > I see no point in your arguments. The situation is pretty simple:
> >
> > 1. if it's general -- use it with extreme care and check
> > every new unstable kernel for modifications.
> > 2. if it's yours -- just track changes in relevant
> > areas.
> >
> > what else do you need ?
>
> Erm... For one thing, to avoid doing pagecache handling by hands?
Of course it would be valuable to have someone doing all general work.
And of course there are some places that need generalization ( directory
caching comes to mind), but my point was to show that if all in-kernel
filesystems could coexist happily with recent infrastructure changes
than most likely all problems are in particular fs code not in infrastructure
itself.
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. I would be happy to hear some arguments that would be able to change
my point of view.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 21:00:20 EST